• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

An Excellent Send-Up of Confirmation Bias Among the AGW Advocates

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,363
Reaction score
27,968
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Be sure to read all the way to the end.


The Neurobiology of Climate Change Denial

Posted on 06 Jun 18 by JOHN RIDGWAY 13 Comments
Much work has already been undertaken to establish the cognitive foundation for the irrationality of climate change denial. Of particular note are the studies undertaken by Lewandowsky, Kahneman, Shapiro and O’Conner, identifying the many cognitive biases that invalidate arguments put forward by those who profess scepticism in the face of the scientific evidence. However, it … Continue reading

. . . Of particular interest is a recent paper1,“The neurobiology of climate change denial”, by Dr Rodriguez Azuela et al, of the Positano Behavioural and Cognitive Research Unit. By revealing significant neural pathologies, the paper promises to throw new light on the puzzling irrationality that appears so intransigent to those who would strive to engage the public’s support for climate change mitigation. In Dr Azuela’s own words:
“We were interested to see how the pattern of neural activity differed between climate change deniers and those who accept the scientific consensus. In particular, we looked for differences whilst they considered the evidence put forward for anthropogenic climate change. For this purpose, subjects who had declared varying degrees of scepticism were confronted with images totemic of climate change evidence and were asked to offer their personal assessment whilst undergoing functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI).”. . . .

 

Jetboogieman

Somewhere in Babylon
Dungeon Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 12, 2010
Messages
29,976
Reaction score
32,418
Location
Somewhere in Babylon...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
*sigh

The unbelievable irony of climate change denialists talking about confirmation bias is nothing short of astounding.
 

Nickyjo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
13,445
Reaction score
3,371
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
A tough thing to do with the scientifically challenged.
Tho I imagine there is something to all this, isn’t an easier explanation of skeptics views that they lean right politically and as such don’t like government regulation of business that human caused climate change might require? Of course scientists will disagree honestly on facts and analysis, but the public debate is pretty openly political. Examining the neurobiology of conservatives/liberals
might be more useful.
 

Visbek

Stuck In The Circle
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
16,816
Reaction score
10,405
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
FYI, the article is fake. There is no Dr Azuela, no Positano Behavioral and Cognitive Research Unit, no Journal of Environmental and Economic Studies.

The author himself says so in the comments:

It was not my intention to embarrass anyone into accidentally revealing that they were fooled by this article. So, to help prevent a recurrence, may I make it clear that this article is a spoof. I wrote it so that readers may personally experience confirmation bias before being pointed in the direction of a scientific study on that subject (reference 2).

The Azuela paper (reference 1) does not exist. However, in the interests of authenticity, I strove to ensure that the neurological references were sound. For example, curiosity does indeed modulate the activation of memory-related brain centres, as listed. Furthermore, psychopathy is indeed characterised by aberrant activity within the centres listed. The rest was just my wicked deceit.

(Emphasis added)
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,363
Reaction score
27,968
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
FYI, the article is fake. There is no Dr Azuela, no Positano Behavioral and Cognitive Research Unit, no Journal of Environmental and Economic Studies.

The author himself says so in the comments:

It was not my intention to embarrass anyone into accidentally revealing that they were fooled by this article. So, to help prevent a recurrence, may I make it clear that this article is a spoof. I wrote it so that readers may personally experience confirmation bias before being pointed in the direction of a scientific study on that subject (reference 2).

The Azuela paper (reference 1) does not exist. However, in the interests of authenticity, I strove to ensure that the neurological references were sound. For example, curiosity does indeed modulate the activation of memory-related brain centres, as listed. Furthermore, psychopathy is indeed characterised by aberrant activity within the centres listed. The rest was just my wicked deceit.

(Emphasis added)
Thank you, Captain Obvious. That is the point.:lamo:mrgreen::roll:
 

Tim the plumber

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
15,592
Reaction score
3,530
Location
Sheffield
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Tho I imagine there is something to all this, isn’t an easier explanation of skeptics views that they lean right politically and as such don’t like government regulation of business that human caused climate change might require? Of course scientists will disagree honestly on facts and analysis, but the public debate is pretty openly political. Examining the neurobiology of conservatives/liberals
might be more useful.
I am a liberal/social democrat.

And a Skeptic.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,363
Reaction score
27,968
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
FYI, the article is fake. There is no Dr Azuela, no Positano Behavioral and Cognitive Research Unit, no Journal of Environmental and Economic Studies.

The author himself says so in the comments:

It was not my intention to embarrass anyone into accidentally revealing that they were fooled by this article. So, to help prevent a recurrence, may I make it clear that this article is a spoof. I wrote it so that readers may personally experience confirmation bias before being pointed in the direction of a scientific study on that subject (reference 2).

The Azuela paper (reference 1) does not exist. However, in the interests of authenticity, I strove to ensure that the neurological references were sound. For example, curiosity does indeed modulate the activation of memory-related brain centres, as listed. Furthermore, psychopathy is indeed characterised by aberrant activity within the centres listed. The rest was just my wicked deceit.

(Emphasis added)
Perhaps you did not understand the thread title? :lol:

send·up
ˈsendˌəp/
noun

noun: send-up

  • an act of imitating someone or something in order to ridicule them; a parody.
    "a delicious sendup of a speech given by a trendy academic"

 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,363
Reaction score
27,968
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Tho I imagine there is something to all this, isn’t an easier explanation of skeptics views that they lean right politically and as such don’t like government regulation of business that human caused climate change might require? Of course scientists will disagree honestly on facts and analysis, but the public debate is pretty openly political. Examining the neurobiology of conservatives/liberals
might be more useful.
The two most important skeptics, IMHO, are both Euro-style Social Democrats.

Nir Shaviv (Israel)
Henrik Svensmark (Denmark)
 

Sunsettommy

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,709
Reaction score
875
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Tho I imagine there is something to all this, isn’t an easier explanation of skeptics views that they lean right politically and as such don’t like government regulation of business that human caused climate change might require? Of course scientists will disagree honestly on facts and analysis, but the public debate is pretty openly political. Examining the neurobiology of conservatives/liberals
might be more useful.
I am an Independent, how did that help you?

:2wave:
 

Lord of Planar

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
40,623
Reaction score
11,842
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
*sigh

The unbelievable irony of climate change denialists talking about confirmation bias is nothing short of astounding.
I understand. It is natural for people like you to deny science, and listen to gospel. After-all, you want to be part of the "in crowd," and don't understand the sciences enough to see clearly.

Science is all about challenging the results of the sciences we know, to expand our understanding.

You and others fail in this, when you automatically go into denial mode of new research.
 

Lord of Planar

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
40,623
Reaction score
11,842
Location
Portlandia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
LOL...

the responses of the warmers were that of confirmation bias...
 

Surface Detail

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
3,244
Reaction score
1,227
Location
English Midlands
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Most hilarious response was #6. Missed the point entirely.
The joke seems to have backfired somewhat, given that the only people who appear to have been fooled by the spoof article are a few fellow climate deniers whose outraged comments appear below it! :lamo

It's almost as funny as the time you cited an article by the wrong Svensmark (thus confirming your complete ignorance of the science), but nowhere near as funny as the time when Tim confused the rainfall figures for Greenland, Michigan with those for Greenland, the continent :lol:
 

Nickyjo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
13,445
Reaction score
3,371
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I am a liberal/social democrat.

And a Skeptic.
Wonderful! I hope you and even deniers are right... Less to worry about... But I harken back to Sen McCain and his comment that even if the danger is exaggerated, what is suggested we do about it is probably good anyway.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,363
Reaction score
27,968
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The joke seems to have backfired somewhat, given that the only people who appear to have been fooled by the spoof article are a few fellow climate deniers whose outraged comments appear below it! :lamo

It's almost as funny as the time you cited an article by the wrong Svensmark (thus confirming your complete ignorance of the science), but nowhere near as funny as the time when Tim confused the rainfall figures for Greenland, Michigan with those for Greenland, the continent :lol:
This is a foolish post. #6 is the laughable work of an AGW true believer.
I cited the Svensmark I wanted to cite. Your failure to understand the point only exposed your own shallowness.
And now we have a wonderful parody. Enjoy.
 

Nickyjo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
13,445
Reaction score
3,371
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
The two most important skeptics, IMHO, are both Euro-style Social Democrats.

Nir Shaviv (Israel)
Henrik Svensmark (Denmark)
Great... But generally they have a reflexively sympathetic audience among conservatives for the reasons I mentioned.
 

Nickyjo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
13,445
Reaction score
3,371
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I am an Independent, how did that help you?

:2wave:
As the saying goes, "no generalization is worth a damn, even this one." You're not a unicorn, but my generalization is generally true, to judge by conservatives in Congress, conservative talk shows, et al.
 

Surface Detail

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 20, 2016
Messages
3,244
Reaction score
1,227
Location
English Midlands
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
This is a foolish post. #6 is the laughable work of an AGW true believer.
I cited the Svensmark I wanted to cite. Your failure to understand the point only exposed your own shallowness.
And now we have a wonderful parody. Enjoy.
#6 was simply pointing out that the spoof is, indeed, a spoof. How is that funny?

What is actually funny is the bleating of climate change deniers who thought it was a real article!
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,363
Reaction score
27,968
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Great... But generally they have a reflexively sympathetic audience among conservatives for the reasons I mentioned.
As the AGW advocates have a reflexively sympathetic audience among liberals. Neither circumstance is important or even scientifically meaningful.
 

Jack Hays

Traveler
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
93,363
Reaction score
27,968
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
#6 was simply pointing out that the spoof is, indeed, a spoof. How is that funny?

What is actually funny is the bleating of climate change deniers who thought it was a real article!
I addressed the #6 poster as Captain Obvious. The humor was the misapprehension that the spoof was some sort of discovery.
 

Sunsettommy

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 28, 2018
Messages
1,709
Reaction score
875
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

As the saying goes, "no generalization is worth a damn, even this one." You're not a unicorn, but my generalization is generally true, to judge by conservatives in Congress, conservative talk shows, et al.
I am an Independent, how did that help you?
 

Nickyjo

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 12, 2016
Messages
13,445
Reaction score
3,371
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I am an Independent, how did that help you?
Good to here that skeptics come from all perspectives, but that doesn’t invalidate my point. I presume that when I listen to Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Levin, et al., they will be skeptics on the question. I assume that a a speaker on the topic would not be received well at a GOP or conservative conference. Apparently recent GOP platforms have gone from accepting climate change and supporting private innovation to fight it eight years ago, to general denial of the issue lately. No doubt there are conservatives who are concerned and liberals who don’t trust the theory, but in general it has sadly become a left-right issue.
 
Top Bottom